ECUADOR

October 10, 2003

I. SUMMARY

1. The
Ecumenical Human Rights Commission (CEDHU); hereinafter “the petitioner”)
lodged a petition with the Inter-American Commission on Human Rights (hereinafter
“the Commission” or “the IACHR”) against the Republic of Ecuador (hereinafter
“the State”) in which it alleged that the following rights protected by
the American Convention on Human Rights (hereinafter “the Convention” or
“the American Convention”) had been violated: the right to humane
treatment (Article 5), the right to personal liberty (Article 7), the
right to a fair trial (Article 8), the right to privacy (Article 11),
the right to equal protection before the law (Article 24), and the right
to judicial protection (Article 25), in contravention of the obligations
set forth in Article 1(1), with respect to Mr. Joffre José Valencia Mero
and his daughters Ivonne Rocío Valencia Sánchez and Priscila Zoreida
Valencia Sánchez.

2. The
parties reached a friendly settlement in the present case on November
12, 2002. This report contains a brief statement of the facts of the
case and the text of the solution reached, in accordance with Article 49
of the Convention.

II. FACTS OF THE CASE

3.
The complaint
of December 28, 1998, reports that at 3:00 p.m. on May 19, 1993, Mr.
Joffre José Valencia Mero and his daughters Ivonne Rocío Valencia
Sánchez and Priscilla Zoreida Valencia Sánchez were arrested by police
officers at the Guayaquil home of Rosendo Torres, the husband of another
of Mr. Valencia’s daughters. The heavily armed police burst into the
house in search of Rosendo Torres, without a search warrant or an order
for his arrest. The victims were accused of being drug traffickers and
were taken to police headquarters, where they were kept incommunicado
for 12 days. During that time they were subjected to verbal and physical
abuse; they were forced to sleep on the floor and, on many occasions,
standing up; and they received death threats, to be carried out if they
did not confess to the crime of drug trafficking. During the first few
days, they were kept blindfolded and were given no food or washing
facilities. On June 1, 1993, Mr. Valencia was transferred to the Quito
Social Rehabilitation Center for Men and his daughters were admitted to
the Quito women’s prison.

4. On May 28,
1993, the judicial proceedings were initiated with a preventive
detention order, on charges of drug trafficking and asset laundering. On
the same date, an order for their imprisonment was issued. In August
1993 the drug-trafficking trial was transferred to the Second Criminal
Court in Pichincha, which affirmed the preventive detention order. On
September 8, 1993, the proceedings for asset laundering were sent to the
Tenth Criminal Court, which also affirmed their preventive detention.
The indictments do not stipulate the degree of participation in the
alleged crime; instead, they level accusations in a general fashion at
all the detainees named in the police report.

5. On January
20, 1995, during the drug-trafficking trial, the second Criminal Law
Prosecutor accused them of being accomplices, and this level of
responsibility was accepted by the Second Criminal Law Judge on May 31,
1996. The Second Criminal Court, in ruling on the case on May 12, 1997,
convicted them, as accomplices, to four-year prison terms; it also
referred the proceedings to the Superior Court for the obligatory
consultation, which was heard by the Fourth Chamber and in which, in a
resolution of November 19, 1997, overturned the conviction and acquitted
them. In the asset-laundering trial, the indictment phase was closed on
April 5, 1994; the proceedings were then referred to the tenth Criminal
Law Prosecutor, who issued his ruling on February 17, 1997. The ruling
charged them with being accomplices, and this level of responsibility
was accepted by the Tenth Criminal Law Judge in ruling on the case on
June 27, 1997; the full proceedings were heard by the second Criminal
Court, which ultimately acquitted them and ordered the consultation
required by law; this was heard by the Fifth Chamber of the Superior
Court which, in July 1998, affirmed the acquittals.

6. Mr. Joffre
José Valencia Mero and his daughters claim compensation for the damages
inflicted by their being arbitrarily kept in detention for more than
five years. Joffre Valencia was arrested on May 19, 1993, and released
on July 22, 1998. Ivonne and Priscila were arrested on May 19, 1993, and
released on July 24, 1998. On February 23, 1998, they filed suit against
the State before the Administrative Tribunal, demanding proper
compensation for the damages suffered. On March 5, 1999, the Second
Chamber of the Administrative Tribunal ruled itself incompetent to hear
the case, declared the suit inadmissible, and ordered the proceedings
filed.

III. PROCESSING BY THE COMMISSION

7. On July 2,
1999, the Commission sent letters to the State and to the petitioner,
respectively. On September 27, 1999, the State, through its Attorney
General, responded to the complaint, claiming that the petitioners had
not exhausted the available domestic remedies and that they should first
file suit for damages in order to comply with the exhaustion requirement.
On November 24, 1999, the Government of Ecuador sent additional
information that had been furnished by the Supreme Court. On December 3,
1999, the petitioners reported that they were willing to work toward a
friendly settlement in this matter. On December 8, 1999, a copy of the
information furnished by the Ecuadorian Government on November 24, 1999,
was forwarded to CEDHU. On January 4, 2000, the State reported that it
was not interested in a friendly settlement, reiterating that the
petitioners had not exhausted the available domestic remedies. This
information was transmitted to the petitioners on February 10, 2000. On
February 22, March 8, and July 7, 2000, the petitioners submitted
comments on the State’s reply. The petitioners’ comments were forwarded
to the State on May 23 and August 30, 2000. On March 27, 2000, the
Commission told the State that the petitioners were interested in a
friendly settlement. On May 23, 2000, the Commission forwarded the
State’s replies of September 27 and November 24, 1999, to the
petitioners.

8. On April 2,
2001, the State informed the Commission that it had begun direct talks
with the petitioners or their next-of-kin in a number of cases,
including the one at hand, with a view toward reaching friendly
settlement agreements.

9.
During a July 2003 visit to Ecuador, representatives of the Attorney
General informed the President of the IACHR, Dr. Marta Altolaguirre,
that they had reached independent friendly settlements with Joffre José
Valencia Mero, Ivonne Rocío Valencia Sánchez, and Priscilla Zoreida
Valencia Sánchez. The parties accepted the possibility of reaching a
friendly settlement, and the three Agreements with the State were signed
on November 12, 2002. The parties asked the Commission to ratify all
parts of this Friendly Settlement Agreement and to oversee its
implementation. In the interests of procedural economy the three
Agreements will be dealt with in a single report, using brackets to
indicate textual variations corresponding to the individual victims.

IV. FRIENDLY SETTLEMENT REACHED

10. The Friendly Settlement
Agreement signed by the parties reads as follows:

I. BACKGROUND

The Ecuadorian State,
through the office of the Attorney General, with a view to promoting and
protecting human rights, and recognizing that the unreserved respect for
human rights is currently of great importance for our country’s
international image, as the foundation of a just, honorable, democratic,
and representative society, has decided to take a new course in the
evolution of human rights in Ecuador.

The Attorney General’s
office has begun talks with all those individuals who have suffered
human rights violations, with a view to reaching friendly settlement
agreements to make reparations for the damages caused.

The Ecuadorian State,
in strict compliance with the obligations it acquired upon signing the
American Convention on Human Rights and other international human rights
instruments, is aware that any violation of an international obligation
that has caused damages triggers the duty to make adequate reparations,
with monetary reparations and criminal punishment of the perpetrators
being the most just and equitable form. Accordingly, the office of the
Attorney General and Mr. Joffre José Valencia Mero [Ms. Ivonne Rocío
Valencia Sánchez] [Ms. Priscilla Zoreida Valencia Sánchez] have agreed
to reach a friendly settlement pursuant to the provisions of Articles
48(1)(f) and 49 of the American Convention on Human Rights and Article
45 of the Rules of Procedure of the Inter-American Commission on Human
Rights.

II. PARTIES TO THE AGREEMENT

The following persons
were present at the signing of this Friendly Settlement agreement:

a)Dr.
Ramón Jiménez Carbo, Attorney General of the State, as indicated in his
appointment and certificate of office, which are attached hereto as
qualifying documents.

The Ecuadorian State
recognizes its international responsibility for having violated the
human rights of Mr. Joffre José Valencia Mero [of Ms. Ivonne Rocío
Valencia Sánchez] [of Ms. Priscilla Zoreida Valencia Sánchez] as
enshrined in Article 8 (Right to a Fair Trial), Article 7 (Right to
Personal Liberty), and Article 25 (Judicial Protection) of the American
Convention on Human Rights, in conjunction with the general obligation
contained in Article 1(1) thereof, and in other international
instruments, since the violations were committed by State agents and
could not be disproved by the State, thus giving rise to State
responsibility.

Given the above, the
Ecuadorian State accepts the facts in case No. 12.188 now before the
Inter-American Commission on Human Rights and agrees to undertake the
necessary reparatory steps to compensate the victims, or their
successors, for the damages caused by those violations.

IV. COMPENSATION

In view of the
foregoing, the Ecuadorian State, through the Attorney General, as the
sole judicial representative of the Ecuadorian State, according to
Article 215 of the Constitution of Ecuador, promulgated in Official
Register No. 1, and in force since August 11, 1998, is awarding Mr.
Joffre José Valencia Mero, citizenship document No. 120027574-9 [is
awarding Ms. Ivonne Valencia Sánchez, citizenship document No.
091197036-6] [is awarding Ms. Priscilla Zoreida Valencia Sánchez,
citizenship document No. 091492945-0] lump sum compensatory damages of
twenty-five thousand United States dollars (USD $25,000.00), to be paid
from the National Budget.

This compensation is
in settlement of all material damages, loss of income, and moral damages
suffered by Mr. Joffre José Valencia Mero [Ms. Ivonne Valencia Sánchez]
[Ms. Priscilla Zoreida Valencia Sánchez], as well as any other claims
that Mr. Joffre José Valencia Mero [Ms. Ivonne Valencia Sánchez] [Ms.
Priscilla Zoreida Valencia Sánchez] or his [her] relatives might
entertain regarding the matter of this agreement, in accordance with
domestic and international law, payable from the National Budget, for
which purpose the Attorney General will notify the Minister of Economy
and Finance so that the obligation may be fulfilled.

V. PUNISHMENT OF THOSE RESPONSIBLE

The Ecuadorian State
undertakes, to the extent possible, to bring both civil and criminal
proceedings and to pursue administrative sanctions against those persons
who, in the course of their official duties or the exercise of public
power, are presumed to have participated in the reported violations.

The office of the
Attorney General undertakes to encourage the Public Prosecutor of the
State, the competent judicial organs, and the competent public or
private agencies to provide legal evidence to determine the
responsibility of those persons. If appropriate, prosecution will be
pursued in accordance with the constitutional and legal framework of the
Ecuadorian State.

VI. RIGHT TO SEEK INDEMNITY

The Ecuadorian State
reserves the right to seek indemnity, pursuant to Article 22 of the
Constitution of Ecuador, from those persons found guilty of human rights
violations in a final judgment handed down by an Ecuadorian court, or
when administrative liability has been determined, in accordance with
Article 8 of the American Convention on Human Rights.

VII. TAX-EXEMPT PAYMENTS

The disbursement made
by the Ecuadorian State to the beneficiary of this Friendly Settlement
Agreement shall be free from all existing or future taxation.

VIII. INFORMATION

The Ecuadorian State,
through the office of the Attorney General, undertakes to report every
three months to the Inter-American Commission on Human Rights on its
fulfillment of the obligations assumed under this Friendly Settlement
Agreement.

In keeping with its
consistent practice and obligations under the American Convention, the
Inter-American Commission on Human Rights will oversee compliance with
this Agreement.

IX.LEGAL
BASIS

The compensatory
damages that the Ecuadorian State is awarding to Mr. Joffre José
Valencia Mero [to Ms. Ivonne Valencia Sánchez] [to Ms. Priscilla Zoreida
Valencia Sánchez]are provided for in Articles 22 and 24 of the
Constitution of the Republic, for violations of the Constitution, of
other national laws, and of the norms in the American Convention on
Human Rights and other international human rights instruments.

This Friendly
Settlement Agreement is entered into on the basis of respect for the
human rights enshrined in the American Convention on Human Rights and
other international human rights instruments, and in accordance with the
policy of the Government of the Republic of Ecuador to respect and
protect human rights.

X.NOTIFICATION
AND APPROVAL

Mr. Joffre José
Valencia Mero [Ms. Ivonne Valencia Sánchez] [Ms. Priscilla Zoreida
Valencia Sánchez] expressly authorizes the Attorney General to bring
this friendly settlement to the attention of the Inter-American
Commission on Human Rights, so that the Commission may confirm and
ratify it in its entirety.

XI. ACCEPTANCE

The parties signing
this Agreement freely and voluntarily express their conformity with and
acceptance of the contents of the preceding clauses, and they state for
the record that they hereby bring to a close the dispute before the
Inter-American Commission on Human Rights regarding the international
responsibility of the Ecuadorian State for violating the rights of Mr.
Joffre José Valencia Mero, [of Ms. Ivonne Valencia Sánchez] [of Ms.
Priscilla Zoreida Valencia Sánchez].

V. DETERMINATION OF COMPATIBILITY AND COMPLIANCE

11. The Commission has found
the Friendly Settlement Agreement transcribed above to be compatible
with Article 48(1)(f) of the American Convention.[2]

VI. CONCLUSIONS

12. The
Commission welcomes the signing of the three friendly settlements
between the State and the petitioners, under the terms of the American
Convention.

13. The
IACHR will continue to monitor compliance of the commitment assumed by
Ecuador with respect to the prosecution of the persons involved in the
alleged acts.

14. The IACHR again notes
that the friendly settlement procedure provided for in the American
Convention offers the possibility of concluding individual cases without
resort to litigation, and that in cases involving various countries, it
has been proven to be an important procedure for resolving alleged
violations, one that can be used by both parties (petitioner and State).

The Inter-American Commission on Human Rights,

Decides:

1. To
certify the State’s compliance with its commitment to make compensation
payments in the amount of USD $25,000 to each of the three victims in
this case.

2. To
remind the State that it must comply fully with the Friendly Settlement
Agreement by initiating judicial proceedings against the persons
involved in the alleged violations.

3. To continue with its
monitoring and supervision of compliance with each and every point in
the friendly settlement; and, in this context, to remind the State,
through the Attorney General, of its commitment to report every three
months to the IACHR on compliance with the obligations assumed by the
State under these friendly settlements.

4. To publish
this report and to include it in its Annual Report to the General
Assembly of the OAS.

Done and
signed at the headquarters of the Inter-American Commission on Human
Rights, in the city of Washington, D.C., on the 10th
day of October 2003. (Signed): José Zalaquett, President; Clare K.
Roberts, First Vice-President; Susana Villarán, Second Vice-President;
Robert K. Goldman, Commissioner.

[1]
Dr. Julio Prado Vallejo, an Ecuadorian national, did not participate
in the discussion of this case in compliance with Article 17 of the
Commission’s Rules of Procedure.

[2]
The Commission notes that the State acknowledged its responsibility
in the violation of the rights protected by Articles 7, 8, and 25 of
the Convention, in conjunction with Article 1 thereof. The agreement
indicates no state acknowledgement of the violations of Articles 5
and 11 reported by the petitioners. This notwithstanding, since the
State has admitted the facts of the case and in light of the
compensation agreed upon as part of the friendly settlement, the
IACHR holds the agreement to be compatible with the Convention.